United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co.
357 U.S. 155 · Decided June 16, 1958 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co. was decided on June 16, 1958 by a vote of 7–2. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Harold H. Burton wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, takings clause” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 357 U.S. 155 · 78 S. Ct. 1097 · 2 L. Ed. 2d 1228 · 1958 U.S. LEXIS 816
- Docket number
- 29
- Decided
- June 16, 1958
- Argued
- January 7, 1958
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- Harold H. Burton
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- 66 Stat. 605
- Type of law
- Infrequently litigated statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | |
| Justice Harold H. Burton | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Charles E. Whittaker | Majority |
Full case caption
United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co. et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1957-123, docket 1957-123-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- United States v. Dow
- Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCracken
- Nelson v. City of New York
- Armstrong v. United States
- United States v. Twin City Power Co.
- United States v. Virginia Electric & Power Co.
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- McGee v. International Life Insurance Co.
- Lambert v. CaliforniaLaw held unconstitutional
- United States v. Dow
- Hanson v. Denckla
- Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCracken
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error